Additional systems and methods for long endurance airship operations using a free-flying tethered airship system

ABSTRACT

In one example, a free-flying tethered airship system includes an upper airship adapted to tailor its lift and drag, a lower airship adapted to tailor its lift and drag, and a tether connecting the upper airship to the lower airship such that the upper airship is at least one kilometer above the lower airship. The upper airship is configured to be equiliberally buoyant, while carrying the tether, in a first altitude range. The lower airship is configured to be equiliberally buoyant in a second altitude range, the first altitude range being higher than the second altitude range. A method for stationkeeping of a free-flying tethered airship system is also provided.

RELATED APPLICATIONS

The present application is a divisional and claims the benefit under 35U.S.C. §120 to U.S. continuation-in-part application Ser. No. 13/969,998and claims the benefit under 35 U.S.C. §120 of U.S. application Ser. No.13/623,757, filed Sep. 9, 2012, entitled “Systems and Methods for LongEndurance Airship Operations,” which is a continuation-in-part andclaims the benefit under 35 U.S.C. §120 of U.S. application Ser. No.13/227,966, filed Sep. 8, 2011, entitled “Lifting Gas Replenishment in aTethered Airship System,” which is a continuation-in-part of U.S.application Ser. No. 13/159,215, filed Jun. 13, 2011, entitled “TetheredAirships.” These applications are hereby incorporated by reference intheir entireties.

The present application also incorporates by reference, in theirentirety, the following applications:

a) U.S. application Ser. No. 13/048,625, filed Mar. 15, 2011, entitled“Systems and Methods for Long Endurance Airship Operations.”

b) U.S. application Ser. No. 13/228,212, filed Sep. 8, 2011, entitled“Systems and Methods for Long Endurance Airship Operations.”

c) U.S. application Ser. No. 13/347,371, filed Jan. 10, 2012, entitled“Airship Launch from a Cargo Airship.”

d) U.S. Prov. Application No. 61/563,187, filed Nov. 23, 2011, entitled“Durable Airship Hull and in situ Airship Hull Repair.”

e) U.S. application Ser. No. 13/677,046, filed Nov. 12, 2012, entitled“Durable Airship Hull and in situ Airship Hull Repair.”

f) International App. No. PCT/US2013/021034, filed Jan. 10, 2013,entitled “Airship Launch from a Cargo Airship.”

g) International App. No. PCT/US2012/028931, filed Mar. 13, 2012,entitled “Systems and Methods for Long Endurance Airship Operations.”

BACKGROUND

There is a recognized need for long endurance aeronautical operationsthat can, for example, provide persistent surveillance, maintain acommunication link, or make in situ science measurements over anextended period of time comprising weeks, months or even years. However,current aircraft have limited endurance. Consequently, extendedaeronautical operations typically involve cycling through multipleaircraft. Specifically, while one or more aircraft is/are performing theintended mission, one or more other aircraft is/are being refueled andpossibly refurbished. This can be both expensive and hazardous. Thetakeoff and landing of aircraft are typically the highest risk portionsof a mission, and each takeoff and landing increases the risk of damageor loss of the aircraft and payload. This is particularly true forlighter-than-air aircraft that tend to be large and relativelyslow-moving. As a consequence, there is a need to reduce the cost andrisk of extended aeronautical operations.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The accompanying drawings illustrate various embodiments of theprinciples described herein and are a part of the specification. Theillustrated embodiments are merely examples and do not limit the scopeof the claims.

FIG. 1 is a diagram of a free-flying tethered airship system comprisingan upper and lower airship attached by a tether, with countervailingwinds at the different altitudes occupied by the upper and lowerairship, according to one example of principles described herein.

FIGS. 2A and 2B are schematic diagrams of an airship with an outer hulland multiple internal ballonets for lifting gas, according to oneexample of principles described herein.

FIG. 3 is a schematic diagram of an airship with a hull and a pluralityof bulkheads separating the internal volume of the hull, according toone example of principles described herein.

FIGS. 4A-4C show examples of airships with one or more integrateddeflection surfaces on an outer hull surface, according to one exampleof principles described herein.

FIG. 5 is perspective diagram of a pair of distinct and non-continuouslifting surfaces suspended below an airship, according to one example ofprinciples described herein.

FIGS. 6A-6C are diagrams of systems for maintaining a taut outer hull bychanging the hull geometry, according to one example of principlesdescribed herein.

FIGS. 6D-6E are diagrams of systems for maintaining a taut outer hull ona lobed airship by changing the hull geometry, according to one exampleof principles described herein.

FIG. 7 is a flowchart of an illustrative method for stationkeeping of afree-flying airship system, according to one example of principlesdescribed herein.

FIGS. 8A-8B are graphs showing propulsion power consumption for atraditional airship and a tethered airship system, according to oneexample of principles described herein.

FIG. 9 is a table that shows three cases to demonstrate the reduction inaltitude transitions that can be achieved with a relaxation of apropulsion optimization objective, according to one example ofprinciples described herein.

Throughout the drawings, identical reference numbers designate similar,but not necessarily identical, elements.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

There is a recognized need for long-endurance aeronautical operations.Desirable missions include low-altitude or tropospheric radio relay,high-altitude or stratospheric radio relay (aircraft supporting thismission are sometimes called “stratsats”), low-altitude surveillance,high-altitude surveillance, signals intercept, and in situ atmosphericobservations, among others. Many of these missions could, conceivably,persist for months or years. For example, an operator of a stratosphericradio relay might desire a single aircraft to remain on-station foryears (if such a feat were possible) in order to maximize return oninvestment and minimize the chance for loss of (or damage to) theaircraft during launch, recovery, and low-altitude operations. Barringthe availability of an aircraft that can remain aloft indefinitely whileperforming a useful mission, an operator might be forced to rely onmultiple aircraft that are “cycled” in such a way that one aircraft isalways “on station” performing its mission. A counter-piracysurveillance mission could also benefit from a long-endurance aircraftthat could remain aloft and on-station, performing its mission formonths or years (or indefinitely).

In the following description, for purposes of explanation, numerousspecific details are set forth in order to provide a thoroughunderstanding of the present systems and methods. It will be apparent,however, to one skilled in the art that the present apparatus, systemsand methods may be practiced without these specific details. Referencein the specification to “an embodiment,” “an example” or similarlanguage means that a particular feature, structure, or characteristicdescribed in connection with the embodiment or example is included in atleast that one embodiment, but not necessarily in other embodiments. Thevarious instances of the phrase “in one embodiment” or similar phrasesin various places in the specification are not necessarily all referringto the same embodiment.

According to one aspect of the principles described herein, afree-flying tethered airship system includes a tether connecting apayload airship and a first logistics airship, or a first logisticsairship and a second logistics airship (which may also be mated to apayload airship). The first logistics airship is configured to beequiliberally buoyant, while carrying the tether, in a first altituderange and the payload airship with its payload, or second logisticsairship (or combination of second logistics airship and payload airshipwith its payload) is configured to be equiliberally buoyant in a secondaltitude range. In one embodiment, the first altitude range is higherthan the second altitude range, such that the first logistics airship isat least one kilometer above the other airship or airships and thetether mechanically transmits drag forces and lift forces between theairships. In such an embodiment, the first logistics airship may betermed an “upper airship” and the payload airship, second logisticsairship, or combination of second logistics airship and payload airship,may be termed a “lower airship”. Note that, for simplicity ofdiscussion, the “lower airship” may refer to one or a plurality ofairships. In some embodiments, the first altitude range is between 20and 50 kilometers above sea level and the second altitude range isbetween 10 and 30 kilometers above sea level. Optionally, a balloonshuttle may be included in the system. The balloon shuttle is configuredto travel up the tether toward the first logistics airship carrying apayload of lifting gas from the lower airship. The payload airship orsecond logistics airship attached to the lower end of the tetherincludes a supply of lifting gas for transfer to the balloon shuttle. Insome embodiments, the lower airship is configured to receivereplenishment from a ground station, the replenishment comprising atleast one of fuel, lifting gas, and new payloads. This replenishment maybe received in a variety of ways, including using another logisticsairship to shuttle the replenishment up to the lower airship. In oneimplementation, a lower end of the tether is attached to the payloadairship and a second logistics airship is mated to the payload airship.Alternatively, the lower end of the tether may be attached to the secondlogistics airship and the payload airship is mated to the secondlogistics airship.

The free-flying tethered airship system may include an upper airship ata first altitude and a lower airship at a second altitude, the upper andlower airships being connected by a tether, in which the first altitudeand second altitude are stratospheric altitudes that are verticallyseparated by at least five kilometers. Maintaining stationkeeping at thestation includes altering the aerodynamic characteristics of at leastone of the airships to improve the stationkeeping performance of thesystem. This may be done in a variety of ways. When the winds at thefirst altitude and winds at the second altitude are traveling insubstantially different directions, altering the aerodynamiccharacteristics of the combined airship may include at least one of:altering the heading of one of the airships, deploying a drogue chute,altering aerodynamic characteristics of the drogue chute, deploying aparafoil, altering the aerodynamic characteristics of the parafoil,changing at least one of the first altitude and the second altitude, orother suitable change, such as altering the attachment point of thetether or altering the attitude (e.g., angle of attack) of one or moreof the airships.

FIG. 1 illustrates a free flying tethered airship system that includes alower airship 101, an upper airship 102 and a tether 103 connecting thelower airship 101 to the upper airship 102. The lower airship 101operates in much denser air than the upper airship 102. For example, thelower airship 101 may operate at altitudes of 15-20 kilometers, with anair density in the range of approximately 100 to 200 grams/meter³ andthe upper airship 102 may operate at altitudes of 27-37 kilometers withan air density in the range of approximately 6 to 30 grams/meter³. Theupper airship 102 is designed to operate at a higher altitude than thelower airship 101, while carrying the full weight of the tether 103. Theupper airship 102 is sufficiently buoyant to carry its own weight andthe weight of the tether 103. In some embodiments, the tether 103 isvery long—possibly in excess of 20 km. It is designed to carry its ownweight without snapping, as well as sustain the tensile loads placed onthe tether 103 by the two airships 101, 102 and the drag forces inducedby the winds 104, 112.

Both the upper airship 102 and the lower airship 101 may include avariety of propulsion and variable drag/lift elements to tailor theirlift and drag. In this illustration, only the lower airship is shownwith propulsion capabilities and variable drag/lift elements are notspecifically shown.

The presence of countervailing winds at different altitudes can be usedto reduce the amount of fuel needed for stationkeeping. In the exampleshown in FIG. 1, the upper airship 102 is subjected to wind 104traveling to the left which results in a drag force 106. The lowerairship 101 is subjected to winds 112 traveling the opposite direction(to the right) which results in drag force 108 to the right. The tether103 connects the upper and lower airships 101, 102 so that the forces onthe overall airship system can fully or partially cancel each other. Avariety of adjustments can be made to the system to adjust the dragforces 106, 108 so that they tend to cancel each other out. Theseadjustments including deployment of variable drag/lift elements,changing altitude, changing the angle of attack of the airships, andother techniques.

In this embodiment, one of the airships may carry a payload and bedesignated as the payload airship and the other airship may be alogistics airship that supports the payload airship. For example, theupper airship 102 may be the logistics airship and the lower airship 101may be the payload airship. The upper airship 102 supports the lowerpayload airship 101 by providing stationkeeping forces through thetether. This reduces the amount of fuel that the lower payload airshipuses for stationkeeping. This allows for significantly longer freeflight missions (in the range of years) without returning the airshipsystem to the earth.

FIG. 1 is only a cartoon illustrating the principles described herein.The elements in FIG. 1 are not necessarily to absolute or relativescale. Further, the elements illustrated may have a variety of differentconfigurations. For example, the upper airship may be a pumpkin lobedballoon as illustrated or have a more elongated dirigible shape.

Scavenging and Purification of Gases

One challenge for long duration flight of airships using lifting gas isthe loss or contamination of lifting gas. This decreases the buoyancy ofthe airship over time and can significantly reduce its lifting capacity.The loss of lifting gas may be due to the lifting gas diffusing throughan undamaged membrane or escaping through a compromised membrane. FIG.2A illustrates in schematic form an airship 200 with outer hull 202 andmultiple internal ballonets (210, 220, 230, 240, 250, 260, 270) forlifting gas. Also shown is a longitudinal plenum or hollow passageway205 running the length of the airship, along its axis, passing througheach of the ballonets. This hollow passageway 205 allows for physicalcommunication between the ballonets, allowing a robotic device to moveamong them, and also allows for the transfer of lifting gas betweenballonets via suitable valves and pumps communicating with it. In thisillustrated embodiment, the space 207 between the ballonets, and betweenthe ballonets and the outer hull 200, is substantially filled withatmospheric gases although some lifting gas may be present due toleakage from the ballonets.

FIG. 2B is a detail view showing a gas separator 295 mounted on or inthe hollow passageway 205. The gas separator 295 can directly access themixture of gases in the space 207 between the ballonets (and between theballonets and the outer hull). The gas separator 295 is adapted toseparate and isolate the lifting gas from the mixture of gases in thespace 207, and transfer or inject the lifting gas into the hollowpassageway 205. In this way, lifting gas is “scavenged” from theairspace inside the outer hull 200, thereby minimizing loss of liftinggas through the outer hull and to the outer atmosphere. A variety ofdifferent methods for separating the lifting gas from the atmosphericgases can be used, including methods using membranes, ceramics, andelectrochemical techniques. Other methods that may be developed in thefuture could also potentially be used. While the gas separator 295 isshown as mounted on the hollow passageway 205, other mounting locationsare possible (such as e.g. the outer hull 200, with suitable connectionsto the hollow passageway 205 or the ballonets themselves), as will beapparent to those of skill in the art.

Using currently-known methods, the gas separator would represent aweight and power penalty for the airship. This has an impact on theoverall size and cost of the airship. From a system design standpoint, adesigner can trade-off this penalty against an alternative that simplyresupplies hydrogen from an external source (such as the balloonresupply method disclosed in various documents incorporated byreference).

In one embodiment, a gas separator is installed on an airship but leftunused except during (and immediately following) a period of significantleakage of lifting gas from one or more of the ballonets. This canminimize the power penalty associated with operating the gas separator,and preserve overall airship performance while an outer hull leak isbeing repaired, and prior to resupply of lifting gas from an externalsource.

It is also possible to scavenge atmospheric gases from the ballonets oflifting gas, thereby preserving the purity of the gases inside theballonets. For example, a cold plate inside a ballonet can capturecarbon dioxide, nitrogen and oxygen while leaving hydrogen in a gaseousstate. Other methods are also feasible. Hatchways 280 and valves 290 areone method of communication between the ballonets and the hollowpassageway 205.

Additional Designs of Inner and Outer Hulls and Ballonets

FIG. 3 illustrates in schematic form a hull, 302, that makes up anaggregate lifting volume for airship 300, and a plurality of membranesor bulkheads 305. The hull 300 could represent a single-hull airship, orthe inner hull in a dual-hull airship. The bulkheads 305 divide theaggregate lifting volume into a plurality of distinct lifting cells. Incomparison to a system with multiple distinct and separate ballonets, asillustrated previously in FIG. 2, this approach reduces total weightsince adjoining lifting cells share a common bulkhead.

In order to facilitate the shifting of lifting gas among the variousdistinct lifting cells, the bulkheads can optionally be designed withexcess material (slack). This can allow lifting gas to be moved from onecell to another cell. By moving lifting gas from cell to cell, leakagecan be minimized and the attitude of the airship can be adjusted. Forexample, if one cell has a significant leak, at least a portion of theremaining lifting gas in the leaking cell can be moved to differentcells. The slack in the bulkhead allows for the other cells to expandtheir capacity without undesirably increasing their internal pressure.In another example, if the location of payload or other mass is shiftedor more mass added, the weight distribution within the airship maychange, which could affect the untrimmed attitude of the airship andtherefore its aerodynamic characteristics. This can be compensated forby pumping lifting gas from one cell to another cell.

Additional Systems and Methods for Adjustment of Drag and Lift

FIGS. 4A-4C illustrates a deflection surface, using flexible materialsor fabrics, integrated with an airship 400. The deflection surfacecreates a duct between the deflection surface and an outer hull surfaceof the airship 400 on which it is mounted. The duct can be opened at itsleading edge, and may be open or closed at its sides and rear. FIG. 4Ais a front view showing four deflection surfaces 410, 420, 430, 440 (andassociated ducts) symmetrically arranged around an airship 400. FIG. 4Bis a cross-sectional side view of the airship 400 showing one deflectionsurface 410 in relation to the airship on which it is mounted. A varietyof mounting and control hardware can be used in conjunction with thedeflection surfaces. For purposes of presentation this mounting andcontrol hardware is not shown in the figures. FIG. 4C is a cross-sectionside view of the airship 400 that shows a deflection surface (450) thatis shorter and does not extend as far to the rear of the airship (400).

Each of the deflection surfaces 410, 420, 430 and 440 can be operated ina closed position, where it is effectively coincident with the surfaceof the airship 400, or an open position (as shown for deflection surface410 in FIG. 4B), or a partially-open position. If an opposing pair ofdeflection surfaces is opened to an equal extent, and the airship isoriented directly into the wind, a pure drag force is generated.Alternatively, in the configuration illustrated in FIG. 4B (where onlyan upper deflection surface 410 is opened, and the other three (notshown) are assumed to be flush with the surface of the airship), anasymmetric force is generated. In the configuration illustrated in FIG.4B, where the duct is open at its trailing edge, a combination of liftand drag is generated. Also in this configuration, whether the trailingedge is open or closed, there is a torque tending to increase theairship's angle of attack (since the deflection panel as illustrated inFIG. 4B is on the upper side of the airship and acts as an elevator),and the resulting airship orientation also tends to increase lift anddrag.

FIG. 4C shows a shorter deflection surface 450 connected to an uppersurface of the airship 400. The exhaust gases from the duct associatedwith this shorter deflection surface (450) will interact less stronglywith the exhaust gases of similar ducts symmetrically arranged, ascompared to exhaust gases associated with ducts that extended furthertoward the rear of the airship as illustrated in FIG. 4B. Also, theshorter deflection surface 450 may be lighter and easier to control thanthe larger deflection surfaces, yet provide sufficient aerodynamic forceto satisfy the control objectives of the system. In general, deflectionsurfaces may be any surface that is connected to an airship and isdesigned to provide a route for air to flow or be captured between thedeflection surface and the hull of the airship. Deflection surfaces maybe controlled or have a static configuration. The deflection surfacesmay have any desired shape or size and may be used to control and/orinfluence pitch, roll, yaw, overall drag, translation forces, andaltitude. In many instances, the use of one or more deflection surfacesmay simultaneously influence a combination of the listed parameters. Thedeflection surfaces may be controlled in any of a number of ways,including control lines, resilient members, inflatable sections, orother methods.

In one embodiment, only an upper or lower deflection surface is provideddepending on whether the airship is an upper airship or a lower airship,respectively. In another embodiment, three deflection surfaces areprovided with the three surfaces comprising left and right (lateral)surfaces, and either an upper surface or a lower surface depending onwhether the airship is an upper airship or a lower airship,respectively.

An airship, with one or several deflection surfaces as illustrated inFIG. 4, can also be equipped with a parachute or parafoil (or both), aspreviously described, attached to the airship or spaced along anassociated tether.

Previous applications by the inventor, incorporated by reference, havedescribed airships with an associated parafoil for generation of lift(although drag is also generated) and an associated parachute forgeneration of drag. These systems can be duplicated—for example using aplurality of parafoils and/or parachutes spaced along a tether, orvariously attached to the tether as well as the airship itself. Anillustrative example is shown in FIG. 5 where a pair of distinct andnon-continuous lifting surfaces 510 and 520 (shown as rigid orsemi-rigid, but not intended to exclude parafoils) is shown suspendedbelow an airship 500. These lifting surfaces are controlled by controlsubsystems 540 and 550, respectively, attached to the airship 500 andspaced along the tether 575. A third control subsystem, not shown, islocated at the rear of the airship and controls the additionalsuspension lines 570 between the airship 500 and the upper liftingsurface 510. By cooperatively changing the lengths of the control andsuspension lines 570, the angle of attack and bank angle of the liftingsurfaces can be adjusted. The elements shown in FIG. 5 and the otherdrawings are not necessarily to absolute or relative scale. For example,the airship 500 has been drawn significantly smaller than it would be inan operational system. The controls 540, 550 have been drawnsignificantly larger than they would be in an operation system. Varyingthe scale of various elements allows for all the elements to beillustrated and the relationships between the elements shown.

The upper airship may be a body of revolution or may be a “lifting body”with some nominal amount of lift (i.e., greater than zero) at the angleof attack that minimizes drag. In a tethered airship system, the upperairship can take advantage of a lifting body geometry to provide somenominal lift (i.e., greater than zero) at the angle of attack thatminimizes drag, thereby reducing the size of the parafoil associatedwith that airship. For the lower airship, an inverted lifting bodygeometry can be used (i.e., providing a downward force).

Additional Deployment Methods

In an embodiment where a lower airship or a cargo/logistics airshipserves as a carrier airship and is required to transport anupper-atmosphere airship and deploy it at an intermediate altitude, andwhere the lower airship or cargo/logistics airship comprises alongitudinal passageway as illustrated in FIG. 2, a convenient storagelocation for the un-inflated or substantially un-inflatedupper-atmosphere airship is the longitudinal passageway.

In a system using such a storage and deployment method, theupper-atmosphere airship is stowed in the longitudinal passageway priorto launch. Excluding gas movements needed to manage internal pressureduring the climb to altitude, all vents and pumps between the passagewayand the ballonets are closed and powered-down prior to deployment inorder to prevent loss of lifting gas during the deployment operation,and also to avoid damage to the upper-atmosphere airship. An airtightendcap, with a pump/valve contained therein, is provided at one end ofthe longitudinal passageway. An airtight “sock” or lining is alsoprovided within the passageway, extending along at least a portion ofthe passageway, with its open end sealed to the walls of the passagewayaround the airtight endcap. Additional frangible or releasableattachment points, adapted to secure the sock or lining along the lengthof the passageway, may optionally be provided. The stowedupper-atmosphere airship is located within this sock or lining.Following launch, and upon achieving the desired deployment altitude forthe upper-atmosphere airship, the endcap is opened and a drogue chuteextracts the upper-atmosphere airship from the passageway (and theairtight sock or lining thereof) while the carrier airship maintains asuitable airspeed to enable proper operation of the drogue, anddeployment. Following deployment, the airtight endcap is closed andsealed. The pump/valve is then operated to extract the ambient air fromthe sock or lining while the vents spaced along the length of thepassageway, outside the lining, allow lifting gas to fill the passagewayas the sock or lining is sucked up against the endcap. If frangibleattachment points were included in the design, they may break away.

Similarly, if releasable attachment points are used, they may becommanded to be released prior to extraction of the ambient air from thesock or lining, and filling of the passageway with lifting gas. Uponcompletion of this process, the sock or lining is compressed tightlyagainst the endcap and the passageway can serve as a plenum between andamong the ballonets or lifting cells with which it communicates, or isconnected to, through the aforementioned vents and pumps. The passagewayis also substantially clear of obstruction, and can be used for themovement of a robotic device between and among the ballonets or liftingcells.

In another embodiment, the sock or lining is not substantiallyrestrained inside the passageway, except for its open end which issealed to the walls of the passageway around the airtight endcap asdescribed above. However, its closed end is attached to a retractionline and a reel/take-up mechanism located at the opposite end of thepassageway from the airtight endcap, said retraction line having alength at least as long as the length of the passageway. In operation,because the sock or lining is not substantially restrained inside thepassageway, it can be extracted along with the upper-atmosphere airshipduring the deployment sequence (although it is possibly turnedinside-out as the upper atmosphere airship is deployed). In thisembodiment, the sock or lining serves as an additional “scuff guard”adapted to protect the upper atmosphere airship from damage as it slidesthrough the passageway during deployment. In order to facilitatedeployment, lifting gas may be vented into the space between the wallsof the passageway and the sock or lining. After the upper atmosphereairship is deployed, the retraction line is retracted to pull the sockor lining completely back into the passageway while simultaneouslypumping lifting gas out of the passageway. The endcap is closed andsealed as before, the retraction line is severed close to its attachmentpoint on the sock or lining (i.e., without puncturing the sock or liningitself), and the atmospheric gases are evacuated (and the passageway isfilled with lifting gas) as previously described.

Additional Accommodations for Volume Changes as a Function of Altitude

FIG. 2 illustrated an airship with an outer hull and multiple ballonetscontaining lifting gas. At a low altitude, the ballonets will berelatively small but the outer hull can be kept taut by maintaining aslight overpressure of atmospheric gases in the spaces between theballonets and the outer hull. As the airship rises, atmospheric gasescan be vented to allow the ballonets to expand without endangering theintegrity of the outer hull. This prevents the outer hull from becomingslack. An outer hull with a significant amount of slack may be difficultto control and have unpredictable interaction with the surrounding air.Additionally, loose flaps of material may flap in wind currents, leadingto damage.

It is also possible to reverse the contents of some or all of theballonets and the outer hull, filling the outer hull with a lifting gasand filling the ballonets with atmospheric gases.

FIG. 6A shows another method to maintain a taut outer hull of an airship600 by changing its geometry. This embodiment uses a plurality oftension structures or tension lines 660 attached to the outer hull 600,and controlled by control boxes 650 spaced along a longitudinalpassageway 605, to change the cross-sectional geometry of the outer hull600. In this figure, substantially vertical tension lines 660 are shownand substantially horizontal tension lines (i.e., running “in and out ofthe page”) are not shown but are presumed to be present. Cross sectionalviews of the expanded and contracted cross-section of the airship 600are shown in FIGS. 6B and 6C, respectively. This concept can beintegrated with the multiple-ballonet airship embodiment illustrated inFIG. 2 or with other airship configurations.

In FIG. 6B, the airship hull 602 has a circular cross section with fourtension lines/structures 660 extending from the central control box 650.In this configuration, the tension lines 660 do not exert substantialforces on the airship hull 602. The configuration in FIG. 6B may beused, for example, at the operational altitude of the airship.

In FIG. 6C, the tension lines have been shortened or retracted into thecontrol box 650. This pulls the portions of the hull toward the controlbox and deforms the hull 602. The interior volume of the airship issignificantly reduced. In this case there are four tension lines and theshape of the contracted hull has four lobes. This configuration may beused at lower altitudes to prevent slack or wrinkling in the hull of theairship. Slack in the airship hull may result in a loss of structure andaerodynamic control of the airship. Slack portions may also flap in theairflow, causing damage to the hull material. Additionally oralternatively, the contracted configuration shown in FIG. 6C may be usedto increase drag produced by airflow over the hull.

FIGS. 6D and 6E are cross sections that show, for an embodimentcomprising a substantially spherical airship, a “pole pull” techniquewhich pulls two antipodal points on the airship toward each other. FIG.6D shows a spherical airship 690 that includes a hull 692, two tensionmembers 660 connected to two opposing points on the hull, and a controlbox 650. FIG. 6D shows the spherical airship in a fully inflatedconfiguration with the pressure of the lifting gas on the interiorplacing the spherical hull in tension. This configuration is typical atthe operational altitude of the airship where the external air pressureis low and volume of the lifting gas is large.

When the tension members 660 are pulled into the control box 650, thespherical hull 692 will be distorted into a toroidal shape as shown inFIG. 6E. This can reduce internal volume by approximately 50% (i.e., ifthe two points are actually pulled to a common point at the center ofthe airship). As discussed above, this can prevent undesirable slack inthe airship hull 692 and be used for aerodynamic control.

Additional Methods for Stationkeeping

An algorithm for equalizing lift and drag, between an upper and lowerairship in a free-flying tethered airship system, at a selected pair ofoperating altitudes for the upper airship and lower airship, isillustrated in FIG. 7. For this algorithm, it is assumed that eachairship can tailor its lift and drag within defined limits. For example,each airship might be equipped with an adjustable parachute and anadjustable parafoil, and each airship can also control its angle ofattack (and heading angle into the wind) so as to alter at least thelift and drag forces experienced by the system. Control parameters forthis illustrative stationkeeping algorithm are airship angle of attack(AoA), parafoil AoA, and parachute size. AoA is measured with respect tothe air mass (the wind direction). Those of skill will appreciate thatthese control parameters can be adapted to account for systems that useother methods for adjusting lift and drag, and additional controlparameters could be added.

For this example, only the east-west wind is considered, the airshipsare assumed to have a constant volume and geometry (perhaps not the sameas each other), and each airship is assumed to be equipped with oneparachute and one parafoil. The parafoils are assumed to have a constantarea (again, perhaps not the same as each other). The lift and drag oneach airship and parafoil is assumed to be a known function of its AoA.The drag associated with each parachute is assumed to be a knownfunction of its variable aperture (alternatively, a fixed apertureparachute could be employed with vents that can be controllably adjustedto modify the drag generated by the parachute).

In this algorithm, the first step at 700 is to check for countervailingwinds (i.e., drag forces). If winds are such that the drag on bothairships, and the tether, are all in the same direction, there are nocountervailing forces and stationkeeping must be performed using thepropulsion system alone (if within its capability). This is indicated atstep 701. If stationkeeping cannot be performed using propulsion alone(or if the energy cost is considered excessive), an altitude changecould be considered using e.g. the methods described previously.

If countervailing winds are available, step 700 also determines if thetwo airships are experiencing countervailing winds with respect to eachother (as indicated with an exemplary cartoon on the left-hand side ofthe figure and the legend “Countervailing Winds At Airships”), or if thetwo airships are experiencing wind in the same direction, with theaggregate drag on the tether operating in the opposite direction(indicated with an exemplary cartoon on the right-hand side of thefigure and the legend “Countervailing on Tether”). It is noted that, inone embodiment, the algorithm that selects the pair of operatingaltitudes could attempt to avoid cases where the two airships experiencewind in the same direction, countered only by tether drag. Limitedsimulations indicate that these cases tend to result in higher requiredpropulsion forces. But there may be times when the situation isunavoidable, or where it leads to a slightly lower propulsion cost.Therefore, it is useful to consider both cases.

If the airships are experiencing countervailing wind (left-hand side ofFIG. 7), the general philosophy for this stationkeeping algorithm is tofirst add lift (upward or downward as needed) for the “high drag”airship, and then add lift and drag at the other airship to zero the netlateral and vertical forces acting on the entire system. Ideally, afterassigning tether drag to one airship or the other, both airships areflown with an aggregate or effective lift/drag (L/D) ratio of 1, withthe drag forces and therefore the lift forces equalized, andstationkeeping is achieved with the airships separated horizontally byroughly the same distance as they are separated vertically.

At step 710, the net drag on the tether is assigned to the airship withdrag operating in the same direction, and the magnitude of the drag onthe two airships is compared (including the tether drag so assigned).The “highest drag” airship is identified. Clearly, drag must beincreased on the other airship, but in order to keep the tetherrelatively vertical so as to avoid excessive tether length, the “highdrag” airship may also need some additional lift in an upward ordownward direction (depending on whether it is the upper or lowerairship, respectively). The illustrated algorithm assumes that lift willalways be added in order to match the (aggregate) drag. But adding liftmay also increase drag, and this must be accommodated in the algorithm.

In step 715, the angle of attack of the “high drag” airship and/or itsassociated parafoil are adjusted to fly the combination at a combinedLift/Drag (L/D) ratio of 1, considering the baseline drag previouslycalculated (possibly including the tether) and any adjustments needed toaccount for drag on the parafoil and airship (i.e., when it/they is/areflying at a non-zero AoA). In general, since this is the high dragairship, lift should be added in a way which minimizes the incrementaldrag force. This could be the parafoil alone, the airship AoA alone, ora combination, depending on the geometry and performance capabilities ofthe system.

If the “high drag” airship is the lower airship, it should be understoodthat the desired lift is downward—angles of attack will be negative andthe lift force will be directed toward the earth. The necessary liftforce can be achieved by flying the airship at a negative angle ofattack, or flying the parafoil at a negative angle of attack, or both.Lift tends to be a linear function of AoA whereas drag tends to be aquadratic function of AoA, and as noted previously, the functionalrelationships are assumed to be known. Thus, the algorithm can calculatethe necessary angles of attack to achieve an overall L/D ratio of 1.This L/D ratio is selected to keep the average tether angle above 45degrees (i.e., substantially vertical) so as to avoid excessive tetherlength in the system. Other values could be selected or applied.

It should be noted that a soft or semi-rigid parafoil may be ineffectiveat achieving very low values of lift, for example if the needed AoAcauses the parafoil to collapse or fail to inflate. In this case, theneeded lift can be generated by adjusting airship AoA alone. Thelimitation associated with soft or semi-rigid parafoils couldpotentially be overcome by using a rigid wing instead of a parafoil. Arigid wing could operate over a wider range of angles of attack,including significant “negative angles” relative to its normalorientation. This would allow the wing to operate at zero lift (althoughthis is dynamically unstable and therefore requires a rapid controlloop), and would also allow a single wing to achieve both upward as wellas downward lift. This might have other advantages, such as the abilityto operate the wing to generate power. However, a rigid wing might beheavier than a parafoil, and the advantages and disadvantages foroverall system cost and performance would need to be assessed.

In order to support the later stages of the algorithm, step 715 alsocalculates the new effective value of total drag due to the airship(including the tether, if it was part of the baseline drag found in step710) and airfoil.

In step 720, attention shifts to the “low drag airship” airship. Upwardor downward lift is added, using airship AoA or parafoil AoA or both, tocompensate for the lift associated with the “high drag airship”including its parafoil. Additional drag forces are calculated (nowoperating to counter the overall drag experienced in the system), andthe new value of total drag (net drag) is calculated. It will beappreciated that the airship and airfoil have different aerodynamiccharacteristics, and so a given amount of lift can be achieved withdiffering amounts of drag. Ideally, the necessary amount of lift isachieved while coming close to compensating, but not exceeding, theeffective value of total drag calculated previously in step 715.

In step 725, the aperture of the parachute associated with the “low dragairship” is then adjusted to add drag as needed to counter the remainingdrag force operating on the system. Vernier adjustments to zero-out anyeast-west drift, experienced over time, can be achieved by adjusting theaperture (or equivalent drag profile) of one or both of the parachutesin the system.

In a practical system, the airships and parafoils can only be operatedover a finite range of angles of attack, and the parachutes are limitedin terms of maximum aperture (or maximum drag, if aperture is fixed andthe parachute employs a system of vents to adjust drag forces). Inexecuting the algorithm, “bounds checking” should be used to stay withinthese limits. At step 730, a check is performed to see if theadjustments actually resulted in a reduction in overall propulsive forceneeded to maintain station. In general, if the winds were countervailingbut wind at one altitude was exceedingly weak compared to the other, thealgorithm might be ineffective since the initial adjustment of lift toequal drag at the “high drag” airship cannot be compensated at the otherairship, even at the maximum AoA and parachute aperture or drag allowed,since that low drag airship is experiencing very weak wind. In thesecases, the system could instead rely on the propulsion system alone(step 735).

Now consider the case where both airships experience a wind in the samedirection, but the winds experienced by the tether result in anaggregate drag force (on the tether) in the opposite direction. Thiscase is handled in the right-hand side of FIG. 7. Two sub-cases must beconsidered (step 740). In the first sub-case, the overall driftdirection of the system is in the same direction as the windsexperienced by the airships. In this case, the system is alreadydrifting in the direction of both airships, and neither airship canapply additional drag to counter this drift. So only propulsion can beused (step 743). In the second sub-case, the overall drift direction ofthe system is in the same direction as the net drag force experienced bythe tether. In this case, the system is drifting in the direction of thetether and the airships can add lift and drag to counter this drift asdescribed below (steps 750 through 765).

It may be noted that, unlike the case considered in steps 710 through735, the tether drag is not aligned with (in the same direction as) thewind or drag force experienced by either airship. Therefore, the tetherdrag is not applied to either airship.

At step 750, lift in an upward and downward direction is added byadjusting airship and parafoil AoA for both the upper and lower airship.This is primarily intended to keep the tether in a substantiallyvertical orientation. In one embodiment of this algorithm, lift is firstcalculated/applied at the “low drag airship” with the intent of adding amagnitude of lift that is as large as, but no larger than, the aggregate(net) drag force experienced by the tether. Lift is then added at the“high drag airship” to compensate and ensure no net vertical motion.These lift forces, in an upward and downward direction, will tend tokeep the tether relatively vertical. However, the amount of lift addedis constrained by several factors. First, due to low wind speed at the“low drag airship”, the maximum amount of lift achievable at thisairship is limited. Second, the generation of lift at each airship,whether by parafoil or airship, generates additional drag. Care shouldbe exercised to avoid generating so much drag that the system starts todrift in the other direction at a high rate (this net drift, in the samedirection as the wind experienced by the airships, can only becompensated with propulsion).

The amount of additional drag, associated with the application of lift,is calculated as part of step 750.

At step 755, if the system is still drifting in the direction of thetether, drag can be added at one or both of the airships in order tocompensate and achieve zero drift rate (if within the capabilities ofthe system).

A performance check is executed at step 760 to verify that overallperformance (net drift) has been reduced. If the system cannotcompensate for all forces using passive techniques (i.e., airship AoA,parafoil, and parachute), propulsion can be added as needed (step 765).

This algorithm assumes only east-west (zonal) wind. A net north-southdrift, for the tethered airship, can be compensated by adjusting thebank angle of one or both of the parafoils (or the heading angle of oneor both of the airships relative to the local wind field) and makingcompensating vernier adjustments for overall lift and drag.

Those of skill will appreciate that the algorithm described here can beaugmented to consider altitude changes, if the winds at variousaltitudes are known with precision or even with a degree of uncertainty.Also, the algorithm can be augmented to accommodate airships withvariable geometry, and parafoils with variable geometry, as long as thelift and drag can be measured or calculated.

One example of the efficacy of these methods is illustrated in FIGS.8A-8B. These figures show the comparative propulsion requirement foreast-west stationkeeping, in kilowatts, between a traditional airshipand a tethered airship using the present invention. The wind data istaken from the NASA/MERRA dataset which is publicly available. The windfield is represented at 6 hour intervals over the two-year simulationperiod from Jan. 1, 2009 through Dec. 31, 2010 (note: only the east-westcomponent of the wind was considered for this simulation; thenorth-south component is typically much smaller, and would becompensated by e.g. heading adjustments for the airships or bank angleadjustments on the parafoils). The simulated stationkeeping location isat ON, 60E.

The traditional airship is modeled on a concept developed by NASA/LaRCin 2007 and documented in NASA/TP-2007-214861 (see specifically Concept15 with parameters tabulated in Table 29 of that publication). This is arelatively large airship (approximately 140 m long; 40 m diameter;116,400 m³ lifting volume) adapted for a communications relay mission.For this simulation, it is assumed to be operated at an altitude of 19km. Its propulsion requirement for stationkeeping as a function of timeis illustrated by the graph in FIG. 8A.

A tethered airship system that includes an upper airship tethered to alower airship, with the lower airship also flown at 19 km, was alsosimulated. Its propulsion requirement is illustrated in the graph inFIG. 8B. The lower airship was assumed to have a combined lifting volumeof 50,000 m³, considering a lower logistics airship and a mated payloadairship carrying the same payload as the traditional airship, with aneffective volumetric drag coefficient for the mated pair of 0.05. Theupper airship was assumed to have a lifting volume of 700,000 m³ withvolumetric drag coefficient of 0.03 (roughly the same drag coefficientas the traditional NASA airship). Each airship in the tethered airshipsystem was assumed to also comprise a parafoil and parachute, and beable to adjust its own angle of attack. Each airship AoA could beadjusted over±20 degrees with an additional impact on its dragcoefficient (i.e., above the baseline value assumed) of 0.0004*AoA².Each airship lift coefficient was modeled as 0.0175*AoA. Parachutes weremodeled as having variable aperture with a maximum aperture of 50 mdiameter and a drag coefficient of 1.5. Parafoils were modeled asrectangular, 50 m×12.5 m, with maximum AoA=12 degrees, liftcoefficient=0.35+0.0375*AoA, and drag coefficient=0.14+0.0002*AoA². Itshould be noted that, for the lower airship and its associated parafoil,the applied angles of attack and “lift forces” are in a downwarddirection.

The upper airship was flown at altitudes between 25 and 37 km. For each6 hour time interval over the simulation time period, an upper airshipaltitude was selected from within this range to ensure countervailingwinds at the two airships (whenever possible), and secondarily tominimize the nominal drag on the two airships plus the tether. Once thealtitude for the upper airship was selected, airship AoA, parafoil AoA,and parachute aperture size were adjusted for both airships, using themethods outlined in FIG. 7, to further minimize drag and provide fordynamic lift to keep the tether substantially vertical. It should benoted that changes in the altitude of the upper airship could alsoresult in small changes in the altitude of the lower airship, if notactively managed, but the simulation assumed that the lower airship wasalways flown at 19 km.

As will be appreciated by those of skill in the art, the design andperformance assumptions used above are “exemplary simplifications”intended to capture sufficient fidelity to make a meaningful high-levelcomparison between alternatives, and are not intended to represent apreferred embodiment. Nevertheless, the simulation results are dramaticand suggest that a tethered airship, embodying the concepts describedherein, can significantly out-perform a traditional airship in terms ofstationkeeping energy efficiency.

The residual propulsion requirement for the tethered airship system,after compensation, is shown in the graph in FIG. 8B. As may be seen,the peak propulsion requirement is reduced by about a factor of 5compared to the traditional airship. More precisely, the propulsionrequirement over the simulated time interval was less than 20% of thepeak requirement for the traditional airship over 99.97% of the sampletime points. For the remaining (single) time point, it was roughly 33%of the peak requirement for the traditional airship. Also, while notimmediately apparent from this time history, the average propulsionrequirement was reduced by about a factor of 20.

In general, only insignificant amounts of propulsion were needed by thetethered airship system except when the winds were light and irregular.Thus, for periods when the Concept 15 based airship had high thrustrequirements for station keeping, the tethered airship system did notrequire significant propulsion. In many cases, including the worst-casewind events represented by the peaks experienced by the traditionalairship during calendar year 2010 (i.e., between 10.4 and 10.7 on thehorizontal axis), the tethered airship system requires no (or almost no)auxiliary propulsion. These reductions in propulsion load aresignificant, and result in substantial reductions in subsystem weightsfor energy storage, energy conversion, and propulsion, as well as areduction in overall size of the lower airship (thereby enabling thesmaller airship size assumed for the simulation).

If the lift and drag on the various elements of the system can only beapproximately calculated, there may be a small residual drift in theeastward or westward direction. This can be accommodated by vernieradjustment of the parachute apertures or vents. These vernieradjustments can also be used to account for variations and uncertaintyin tether drag.

The simulation results for the tethered airship, shown in FIG. 8B,assumed that an optimum altitude for the upper airship was selected ateach time point to ensure countervailing winds at the two airships(whenever possible), and secondarily to minimize the nominal drag on thetwo airships plus the tether (i.e., prior to further compensation withairship AoA, parafoil AoA, and parachute drag). This is a good heuristicapproach that typically results in very low propulsion requirements,although they are not guaranteed to be the absolute minimum. Otheralgorithms are feasible and could be explored to further reduce the peakand average propulsion requirements of the system. For example, insteadof selecting a nominal altitude based on minimum drag in anuncompensated state, each altitude could be examined to determine itsoptimum stationkeeping configuration, and all of these alternativescould be examined to select the one with the lowest propulsion cost.This would involve more computation, but might result in improvedperformance.

One operational penalty, associated with the two algorithms describedabove, is a large number of altitude transitions over the course of asimulated mission. Potentially, each timestep in the simulation(equivalent to a new set of weather data in an operational system) couldresult in an altitude transition. Each downward transition involves theapplication of work to “reel in” the upper airship against the forcerepresented by its natural buoyancy as well as any dynamic lift applied,and both upward and downward transitions contribute to wear and tear onthe tether, and require careful management of internal airshippressures. As a consequence, many operational systems will seek tominimize the number of altitude transitions executed over time. Thiswill tend to increase the amount of propulsion required, since altitudesare no longer selected with a single goal of minimizing this parameter.However, in many cases the penalty will not be severe.

FIG. 9 is a table that shows three cases, purely by way of example, todemonstrate the reduction in altitude transitions that can be achievedwith a relaxation of the propulsion optimization objective. The firstcolumn of the graph describes one illustrative criterion for making analtitude change. The values listed in the first column are percentagesof total achievable thrust used in the previous time step. If thepercentage of thrust used in the previous time step exceeded the listedpercentage of total achievable thrust, the altitude of the upper airshipwas changed. If the percentage of thrust used in the previous time stepwas less than the listed percentage of total achievable thrust, nochange in altitude was made.

The second column reports the largest amount of power consumed (inkilowatt hours) in any 12 hour period using the criteria in the firstcolumn. The third column reports the largest amount of power used (inkilowatt hours) in any 24 hour period using the altitude change criteriain the first column. The second and third columns can be used toestimate the sizes for propulsion engines and, if solar power is beingused, to size the solar panel array.

The fourth column reports the total amount of power consumed over a twoyear mission in megawatt hours. The fourth column can be used toestimate a total amount of fuel/energy needed over the two year mission.This energy would have to stored, delivered, or captured over the twoyear mission.

The fifth column describes 99.5 percentile thrust with respect tomaximum thrust capability. The data for the three simulations isreported as a percentage of the maximum thrust produced by the system.In this simulation, the maximum available thrust results in motion ofthe lower airship at an airspeed of 20 meters per second in aminimum-drag configuration, if it is not encumbered by any otherelements. The tethered airship system as a whole can maintainstationkeeping 99.5% of the time using the reported percentage of itstotal thrust capability.

The last column shows illustrative graphs of the altitude changes madeas a result the criteria listed in the first column, the airship systemdescribed above and the wind data described above over a two year timeperiod. Each of the illustrative graphs has time on the horizontal axisand altitude of the upper airship on the vertical axis. Vertical linesin the traces on the charts represent altitude changes. Horizontal linesin the traces represent holding an altitude.

The top row in the table is the baseline already described above, wherea (potentially) new altitude is selected at every time step. Thepropulsive load, for a worst “half-day” (i.e., potentially a night-timeperiod), worst full day, and a full two-year mission, is tabulated alongwith an illustrative trace showing the altitude transitions for theupper airship. As may be seen, propulsion requirements are low butnon-zero. For the simulated scenario, station-keeping could be performedfor 99.5% of all time points while “exercising” the propulsion system toonly 17% of its full capability (in this case, as noted above, fullcapability was defined as 20 m/s airspeed for the lower airshipconsidered alone). Also as may be seen from the large number of verticallines in the trace in the upper chart, a large number of altitudetransitions were commanded.

The second row uses the same optimization methods, but applies a simpleheuristic that prevents any altitude change when the propulsion load inthe previous time step was less than 5% of the maximum propulsioncapability in the system. As may be expected, this leads to an increasein the typical and worst-case propulsive loads on the system. But thedifference is less than a factor of 2:1 and there is a dramaticreduction in the number of altitude transitions over time, as indicatedby the trace in the right-hand chart of the middle row.

The third row illustrates the effect (for this scenario) of blocking anyaltitude change when the propulsion load in the previous time step isless than 20% of the maximum propulsion capability in the system. Thisresults in a further increase in propulsive load along with a furtherreduction in the number of altitude transitions commanded by the system.

In summary, in the first scenario the optimum altitude was alwayssought. This resulted in lower energy requirements and potentially asmaller required propulsion unit. However, the altitude changedfrequently, potentially resulting in increased wear on the winching andtether system. For more relaxed approaches (rows 2 and 3) to makingaltitude decisions, the energy and propulsion requirements increased butthe number of times the altitude changed was drastically reduced. Thus,it is possible to trade-off lateral propulsion loads against verticalaltitude transitions in order to satisfy a variety of possible operatingstrategies and constraints.

The preceding description has been presented only to illustrate anddescribe embodiments and examples of the principles described. Thisdescription is not intended to be exhaustive or to limit theseprinciples to any precise form disclosed. Many modifications andvariations are possible in light of the above teaching.

What is claimed is:
 1. A free-flying tethered airship system comprises:an upper airship configured to tailor its lift and drag; a lower airshipconfigured to tailor its lift and drag; and a tether connecting theupper airship to the lower airship such that the upper airship is atleast one kilometer above the lower airship, wherein: the upper airshipis configured to be equiliberally buoyant, while carrying the tether, ina first altitude range; the lower airship is configured to beequiliberally buoyant in a second altitude range, the first altituderange being higher than the second altitude range.
 2. The system ofclaim 1, wherein at least one of the airships comprises a lifting bodyadapted to achieve non-zero lift at an angle of attack that minimizesdrag.
 3. The system of claim 1, wherein the lower airship comprises aninverted lifting body adapted to achieve a downward force at an angle ofattack that minimizes drag.
 4. The system of claim 1, wherein at leastone of the airships is adapted to tailor its lift and drag using aplurality of distinct and non-continuous lifting surfaces.
 5. The systemof claim 1, wherein at least one of the upper airship and lower airshipfurther comprise: an outer hull; multiple internal ballonets for liftinggas; and a gas separator adapted to scavenge lifting gas from a spacebetween the ballonets and the outer hull.
 6. The system of claim 5,further comprising a plenum allowing for gaseous flow among theballonets, wherein the gas separator delivers purified lifting gas tothe plenum.
 7. The system of claim 1, wherein at least one of the upperairship and lower airship further comprises a plurality of liftingcells, wherein at least two of the lifting cells share a common membraneor bulkhead.
 8. The system of claim 1, wherein at least one of the upperairship and lower airship further comprise a flexible duct on an outerhull surface that can be opened or closed to generate at least one oflift, drag, or torque.
 9. The system of claim 1, in which the lowerairship comprises a longitudinal passageway internal to the airship,wherein the longitudinal passageway is configured to carry a secondairship in a substantially un-inflated state and deploy the secondairship while airborne, wherein the longitudinal passageway is furtherconfigured to serve as a plenum among a plurality of ballonets orlifting cells.
 10. The system of claim 9, wherein longitudinal passageway further comprises a valve for fluidically connecting to eachballonet and a hatchway into each ballonet.
 11. The system of claim 1,wherein at least one of the upper airship and lower airship furthercomprise: an outer hull; and a plurality of tension members adapted tochange the geometry of the outer hull.
 12. The system of claim 11,wherein the tension members are located inside the outer hull and areconnected to an interior surface of the outer hull, wherein the tensionmembers are configured to retract to reduce the volume of the outer hulland to maintain a positive pressure inside the outer hull.
 13. Afree-flying tethered airship system, comprising: an upper airshipconfigured to tailor its lift and drag; a lower airship configured totailor its lift and drag; and a tether connecting the upper airship tothe lower airship such that the upper airship is at least one kilometerabove the lower airship, wherein: the upper airship is configured to beequiliberally buoyant, while carrying the tether, in a first altituderange; the lower airship is configured to be equiliberally buoyant in asecond altitude range, the first altitude range being higher than thesecond altitude range; in which the lower airship comprises alongitudinal passageway internal to the airship, wherein thelongitudinal passageway is configured to carry the lower airship in asubstantially un-inflated state and deploy the lower airship whileairborne, wherein the longitudinal passageway is further configured toserve as a plenum among a plurality of ballonets.
 14. The system ofclaim 13, wherein at least one of the airships comprises a lifting bodyadapted to achieve non-zero lift at an angle of attack that minimizesdrag.
 15. The system of claim 13, wherein the lower airship comprises aninverted lifting body adapted to achieve a downward force at an angle ofattack that minimizes drag.
 16. The system of claim 13, wherein at leastone of the airships is adapted to tailor its lift and drag using aplurality of distinct and non-continuous lifting surfaces.
 17. Thesystem of claim 13, wherein at least one of the upper airship and lowerairship further comprise: an outer hull; multiple internal ballonets forlifting gas; and a gas separator adapted to scavenge lifting gas from aspace between the ballonets and the outer hull.
 18. The system of claim13, wherein at least one of the upper airship and lower airship furthercomprises a plurality of lifting cells, wherein at least two of thelifting cells share a common membrane or bulkhead.
 19. The system ofclaim 13, wherein at least one of the upper airship and lower airshipfurther comprise a flexible duct on an outer hull surface that can beopened or closed to generate at least one of lift, drag, or torque. 20.A free-flying tethered airship system comprises: an upper airshipconfigured to tailor its lift and drag; a lower airship configured totailor its lift and drag; and a tether connecting the upper airship tothe lower airship such that the upper airship is at least one kilometerabove the lower airship, wherein: the upper airship is configured to beequiliberally buoyant, while carrying the tether, in a first altituderange; the lower airship is configured to be equiliberally buoyant in asecond altitude range, the first altitude range being higher than thesecond altitude range; wherein the lower airship comprises alongitudinal passageway internal to the airship, wherein thelongitudinal passageway is configured to carry the lower airship in asubstantially un-inflated state and deploy the lower airship whileairborne, wherein the longitudinal passageway is further configured toserve as a plenum among a plurality of ballonets; and whereinlongitudinal passage way further comprises a valve for fluidicallyconnecting to each ballonet and a hatchway into each ballonet.